I feel bad for those affected by the shooting in Aurora last week. I really do. However, it's interesting how we, as a society, react to such events. In an average day, ~40 people in the U.S. are murdered, ~90 die in automobile crashes/accidents, and dozens of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles. Undoubtedly, some of these people are every bit as innocent as the folks in the movie theater were. Where are their tributes and candle-light vigils? Where are their charity drives? The innocent people who die in non-dramatic stories seem to whither away in relative obscurity compared to the pop coverage of these types of shootings (Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc.).

I mention this not to diminish the events that happened in Aurora. I'm just curious as to why stories like this one "catch on". There are many innocent people killed doing things that we all do every day, so I don't think it's because "it could have been me". I suspect it's the result of the rare nature of the Aurora shooting and the relatively large number of deaths in such a small area -- it's such a "shocking" event, unlike the vehicle fatalities or murders involved innocent folks that we're now accustomed to as we watch/read the news. If people really cared about innocent people dying, then it probably shouldn't matter how they died (well, within reason). How many people have donated to the families who have lost innocent loved ones in car accidents or other fatal events since Aurora?

Wolf892:I too hate when the rich come out with something that begs us normies to pony up the cash. I especially hate it when a celeb gets an illness and then suddenly ends up on tv talking about how we all have to donate to find a cure...that celeb didn't care about a cure until he/she had the illness...and these rich folk don't care a hoot about the suffering of the normies in everyday life...Rich people could just plunk down their own money for a change, like this shooting. If Zimmer wanted, he could buy each and every one of the people in that theater a new house or pay off every medical bill that the injured received...but no, he writes something on his piano that probably took him thirty minutes and basks in the glow of hero worship while us normies cough up the dough.Rich people have one rule, never invest your own money in a project. Follow that rule, and you'll get rich.

To you and all the others like you out there. We get it. You are a troll. You are special. You have contrarian views. You are some or all of these things.

The guy made a single and said that 100% of the proceeds will be donated to victims. If you like his music, willing to spend $1.29 for it, which will also benefit victims, then it seems like a great situation for all involved. Buy your music, make your donation, and carry on.

If you do not like his music, but still want to help, you can just donate, any amount, whatever you like.

If you don't want to donate, that's fine too. No one is forcing you to participate in this. Carry on.

But NO, you act outraged that you might be asked to donate a nominal sum. The "rich" guy could afford to pay them millions, why are you asking me for $1.29? Waaah. Waaaahhh! Rich people are oppressing us "normies".

If you want to donate, do it. If you don't want to, that's fine too. No need to whine about it.

Would say that I'm shocked about some of the reaction to what I thought was a very nice gesture by a good man (Zimmer is known as a good guy in film circles - much admired, in fact). I would say it, only I won't because this is Fark and.... well, we all know how contrary this place is. Part of the fun.

That said, I bought the single for four reasons:

1) I like Zimmer's work, so would likely have bought it anyway;2) It's very, very inexpensive;3) It is part of the process of coming to terms with a horrible event which should not have happened; an event which happened in a place people don't generally feel threatened in; and4) As someone who does some work on films, it felt like a good thing to do, and something I wanted to at least play some (tiny) part in.

As it turns out, it's a very emotional and beautifully written and recorded piece. Don't like it? Fine, but the fact is that these things can be about more than money - it's a way of showing emotional support, and (I'm not in the U.S.) being able to do something, even if it is indeed a token gesture.

I laid flowers at the base of the entrance to the American embassy in my city after 9/11, along with many other people. Didn't help as such, but it helped with the helplessness, and it helped with showing support. In my opinion.

Would say that I'm shocked about some of the reaction to what I thought was a very nice gesture by a good man (Zimmer is known as a good guy in film circles - much admired, in fact). I would say it, only I won't because this is Fark and.... well, we all know how contrary this place is. Part of the fun.

That said, I bought the single for four reasons:

1) I like Zimmer's work, so would likely have bought it anyway;2) It's very, very inexpensive;3) It is part of the process of coming to terms with a horrible event which should not have happened; an event which happened in a place people don't generally feel threatened in; and4) As someone who does some work on films, it felt like a good thing to do, and something I wanted to at least play some (tiny) part in.

As it turns out, it's a very emotional and beautifully written and recorded piece. Don't like it? Fine, but the fact is that these things can be about more than money - it's a way of showing emotional support, and (I'm not in the U.S.) being able to do something, even if it is indeed a token gesture.

I laid flowers at the base of the entrance to the American embassy in my city after 9/11, along with many other people. Didn't help as such, but it helped with the helplessness, and it helped with showing support. In my opinion.

Well said. The guy makes music for a living, and is donating ALL of the proceeds of this, which he made because of the incident. I normally do not buy, or donate money to causes, but I certainly wouldn't look down on someone who starts a fund to help innocent victims. That's retarded. I'm looking at you, wolf892

WxGuy1:I feel bad for those affected by the shooting in Aurora last week. I really do. However, it's interesting how we, as a society, react to such events. In an average day, ~40 people in the U.S. are murdered, ~90 die in automobile crashes/accidents, and dozens of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles. Undoubtedly, some of these people are every bit as innocent as the folks in the movie theater were. Where are their tributes and candle-light vigils? Where are their charity drives? The innocent people who die in non-dramatic stories seem to whither away in relative obscurity compared to the pop coverage of these types of shootings (Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc.).

I mention this not to diminish the events that happened in Aurora. I'm just curious as to why stories like this one "catch on". There are many innocent people killed doing things that we all do every day, so I don't think it's because "it could have been me". I suspect it's the result of the rare nature of the Aurora shooting and the relatively large number of deaths in such a small area -- it's such a "shocking" event, unlike the vehicle fatalities or murders involved innocent folks that we're now accustomed to as we watch/read the news. If people really cared about innocent people dying, then it probably shouldn't matter how they died (well, within reason). How many people have donated to the families who have lost innocent loved ones in car accidents or other fatal events since Aurora?

Its sensational because a dozen people being killed by a crazed gunman isnt a normal occurrence. Yeah ~40 people are murdered every day, most of those arent random. Usually when someone gets murdered theres a reason for it besides wrong place wrong time. Not necessarily a good reason, slept with your wife or stole your drugs or in a rival gang arent GOOD reasons, but theyre reasons that the average person can understand. That is not the case with random spree killings like this.

WxGuy1:I feel bad for those affected by the shooting in Aurora last week. I really do. However, it's interesting how we, as a society, react to such events. In an average day, ~40 people in the U.S. are murdered, ~90 die in automobile crashes/accidents, and dozens of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles. Undoubtedly, some of these people are every bit as innocent as the folks in the movie theater were. Where are their tributes and candle-light vigils? Where are their charity drives? The innocent people who die in non-dramatic stories seem to whither away in relative obscurity compared to the pop coverage of these types of shootings (Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc.).

I mention this not to diminish the events that happened in Aurora. I'm just curious as to why stories like this one "catch on". There are many innocent people killed doing things that we all do every day, so I don't think it's because "it could have been me". I suspect it's the result of the rare nature of the Aurora shooting and the relatively large number of deaths in such a small area -- it's such a "shocking" event, unlike the vehicle fatalities or murders involved innocent folks that we're now accustomed to as we watch/read the news. If people really cared about innocent people dying, then it probably shouldn't matter how they died (well, within reason). How many people have donated to the families who have lost innocent loved ones in car accidents or other fatal events since Aurora?

This pretty much covers how I feel about this event, and all the coverage it's been getting 24/7 since it happened. Of course it's newsworthy, now let it go. I don't need all the feel-good bullshiat stories and tributes, there are other things more important happening in the world right now.

shoegaze99:But traffic accidents are a regular part of life. We expect them.

That's pretty much my point: We think some deaths are more important than others because some are "a regular part of life" and some are, well, not so regular. We're not reacting to the deaths -- we're reacting to the novelty. When you come right down to it, it's not about the deaths at all.

And no, there's no proportionality. Some people are honored locally, but most aren't. They might get a mention in the newspaper -- "fatal traffic accident at the corner of South and Main" -- but Hans Zimmer doesn't write music for them. Flags aren't flown at half-staff. Politicians don't make speeches. 14 people have died on the roads since I wrote my last post ... they all have stories just as special, just as tragic, as the ones in Aurora ... but CNN doesn't have those stories on their home page. The 77-year-old lady who died in a fire right near me on Friday night ... she got 574 words in the local paper. 384 of them were about how she might have been a hoarder. A woman died in a car crash last night, and her husband was injured, when another car ran a stop sign and T-boned them. Family members in a car following them had the joy of watching it happen. 120 words. I did a search on "Aurora Colorado" in that same paper and got 73 hits, of which inspection showed 22 were about the shootings.

Think about it: 12 people who were killed a thousand miles away are more important to the people in my town, and it's not all that big a town, than a person who was killed yesterday. They don't even tell us when yesterday ... just "Saturday." She gets 120 words, not 22 articles. She was someone's wife, someone's daughter, probably someone's mother or sister or co-worker, someone's friend. She was just as important to someone as Alex Teves. But she gets 120 words in a local paper, and nothing more.

Sure, I know why people do it. They latch onto the dramatic, the exciting, the unusual. That's why they're afraid of being killed by a snake but not a dog. Why they're afraid of flying but not driving to the airport. Why they do a lot of things. The "why do we..." part is rhetorical. My point is that we should really examine our thinking, our reactions, and ask ourselves if they're appropriate. It should be (at least!) just as big a deal to someone living in my town that a person was killed in a car wreck yesterday, with her family watching, than that some stranger was killed a thousand miles away. But like you said, "traffic accidents are a regular part of life." Too many people don't really care about the individuals, don't really care about the deaths, they just want something to get emotional about, and someone to tell them how and why to get emotional about it.

I think that's a big part of what's wrong with our country. We care about the dramatic, the flashy, the packaged-for-TV events, but not about the things that actually affect us. As I said earlier, how many of the people who have given money to any Aurora victims' fund have done the same for local fire victims, or even something like their local animal shelter or food pantry?

We need to look at, and react to, what's happening around us. Like Harry Chapin said ... what happens the day after Thanksgiving?

WxGuy1:In an average day, ~40 people in the U.S. are murdered, ~90 die in automobile crashes/accidents, and dozens of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles. Undoubtedly, some of these people are every bit as innocent as the folks in the movie theater were. Where are their tributes and candle-light vigils? Where are their charity drives?

Probably happening right now in their home towns, as they always do. I see them all the time. Routinely. They don't make national news because, you know, their deaths aren't national news. But they are honored by the people whose lives they touched, as is appropriate, and they are regularly covered by their local media, as is appropriate.

If a dozen pedestrians were killed by a driver who went out of his way to run them down, you bet it would garner national attention.

This shouldn't even need to be explained. It's man bites dog.

Worldwalker:And another 43 people have died on American highways since my last post. Where is their national outpouring of grief? 4 more have died in house fires. Where is their candlelight vigil?

The candlelight vigil is probably taking place in their home town. There is no national outpouring of grief for those highway deaths because they are 43 separate and unrelated incidents that did not take place on the national stage and did not take place in a place and context where tragic death is a known quantity like it is on the roads. If there was a single tragic accident that took a dozen lives, and at the hands of someone who purposely killed them, then you would see a national outpouring of grief.

But traffic accidents are a regular part of life. We expect them. We know some will be tragic. A dozen people being shot while sitting back to watch a movie is not a regular part of life. It's unexpected and shocking.

I don't buy anything for a cause, no matter how important I think the cause is. If I want to donate to something (shooting victims, a Girl Scout troop, cancer research, whatever) I'll donate to them -- I'll write a check (or, these days, just go to my favorite charities' websites). When I see "5% of our profits go to charity" I read "95% of our profits and everything we can call an expense go straight to our pockets." Since the manufacturer's profit on a $10 item is likely to be around a dollar, a nickel would go to that charity. If I buy a cheaper item -- say, for $9 -- and send the charity the difference, they're making out 20x over.

If you want to buy stuff, buy stuff. If you want to donate money to a charity, donate money to a charity. But don't be fooled by the marketers who try to convince you that doing the former is the same as doing the latter.

And another 43 people have died on American highways since my last post. Where is their national outpouring of grief? 4 more have died in house fires. Where is their candlelight vigil?

Do you have a volunteer fire department serving your area? Did you donate to their last fundraiser? Who in your area helps the victims of fires? Do you even know? Did you give them so much as $1.29? And did you push the little "test" button on your smoke detectors yet?

ExcaliburPrime111:People who want to help get an incentive to make a nominal donation, which if multiplied over a large enough number of people, will result in a substantial donation.

Sure, it might be possible for him to donate a ton of money directly, but here you are, crying over the possibility of donating $1.29, yet you expect someone else to pay out hundreds of thousands or more. Come on.

Yeah, this time around, I'm not sure what the complaining is about. He got his money from writing compositions for movies. These people got rich because people like you and I went to see a movie, we paid for tickets, and in the case of something like Batman, probably bought some sort of merchandise. If he just reaches into his wallet to give freely, he's giving them money that used to be yours. I doubt you've gotten through much of your movie-watching adult life without being exposed to Hans Zimmer. Ever seen Gladiator? Pirates of the Caribbean? Inception? You paid the man. What he's proposing is that you buy a copy of something he wrote, and that money goes to shooting victims. I don't see the outrage.

Would say that I'm shocked about some of the reaction to what I thought was a very nice gesture by a good man (Zimmer is known as a good guy in film circles - much admired, in fact). I would say it, only I won't because this is Fark and.... well, we all know how contrary this place is. Part of the fun.

That said, I bought the single for four reasons:

1) I like Zimmer's work, so would likely have bought it anyway;2) It's very, very inexpensive;3) It is part of the process of coming to terms with a horrible event which should not have happened; an event which happened in a place people don't generally feel threatened in; and4) As someone who does some work on films, it felt like a good thing to do, and something I wanted to at least play some (tiny) part in.

As it turns out, it's a very emotional and beautifully written and recorded piece. Don't like it? Fine, but the fact is that these things can be about more than money - it's a way of showing emotional support, and (I'm not in the U.S.) being able to do something, even if it is indeed a token gesture.

I laid flowers at the base of the entrance to the American embassy in my city after 9/11, along with many other people. Didn't help as such, but it helped with the helplessness, and it helped with showing support. In my opinion.

Don't feel too bad. Some farkers just take joy out of being contrarian assholes. They haven't donated a dime to help anyone, but love saying other people didn't do enough.

In this day and age....we don't need charities. This one may or may not be questionable, but there is (at least) a possibility of it. Besides - if you buy anything off iTunes you are paying the Apple tax. Then you've got the charity itself that may take a non-trivial cut from each donation for all the hard work they do in accepting money. That's only half a joke - at they very least they've got a lot of government red-tape to deal with to get and maintain their tax-free status and that does cost money. Nevermind the slew of people who are employed at charities taking home very large salaries while producing nothing and giving nothing.

We have the internet. We have Facebook. Send $1.29 straight to one of the victims or the family of one of them. It can't be that hard to figure out.

Wolf892:ExcaliburPrime111: Wolf892: I too hate when the rich come out with something that begs us normies to pony up the cash. I especially hate it when a celeb gets an illness and then suddenly ends up on tv talking about how we all have to donate to find a cure...that celeb didn't care about a cure until he/she had the illness...and these rich folk don't care a hoot about the suffering of the normies in everyday life...Rich people could just plunk down their own money for a change, like this shooting. If Zimmer wanted, he could buy each and every one of the people in that theater a new house or pay off every medical bill that the injured received...but no, he writes something on his piano that probably took him thirty minutes and basks in the glow of hero worship while us normies cough up the dough.Rich people have one rule, never invest your own money in a project. Follow that rule, and you'll get rich.

To you and all the others like you out there. We get it. You are a troll. You are special. You have contrarian views. You are some or all of these things.

The guy made a single and said that 100% of the proceeds will be donated to victims. If you like his music, willing to spend $1.29 for it, which will also benefit victims, then it seems like a great situation for all involved. Buy your music, make your donation, and carry on.

If you do not like his music, but still want to help, you can just donate, any amount, whatever you like.

If you don't want to donate, that's fine too. No one is forcing you to participate in this. Carry on.

But NO, you act outraged that you might be asked to donate a nominal sum. The "rich" guy could afford to pay them millions, why are you asking me for $1.29? Waaah. Waaaahhh! Rich people are oppressing us "normies".

If you want to donate, do it. If you don't want to, that's fine too. No need to whine about it.

I'm not trying to troll, I'm just saying...if I was Superman, I wouldn't go around asking the general crowd to lift the car off ...

Why should the guy pay hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) over a tragedy that he was not responsible for? His way of contributing is by doing what he does best - making music. He is donating all of the proceeds, so as not to "cash in" on the tragedy and so as to provide the maximum funds to the victims.

People who want to help get an incentive to make a nominal donation, which if multiplied over a large enough number of people, will result in a substantial donation.

Sure, it might be possible for him to donate a ton of money directly, but here you are, crying over the possibility of donating $1.29, yet you expect someone else to pay out hundreds of thousands or more. Come on.

Meesterjojo:Kill 12 people in a theater: Tragedy. Kill 14 in your truck: whatever.

One group of people were killed in cold blood while trying to have a fun night out at the movies. The other group died because they were stupid enough to think that you could safely drive a truck with 23 people stuffed into it. It's hard to feel that sorry for someone who Darwins themselves. Not only were they being stupid, but they REALLY weren't doing much to dispel racist stereotypes.

WxGuy1:I feel bad for those affected by the shooting in Aurora last week. I really do. However, it's interesting how we, as a society, react to such events. In an average day, ~40 people in the U.S. are murdered, ~90 die in automobile crashes/accidents, and dozens of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles. Undoubtedly, some of these people are every bit as innocent as the folks in the movie theater were. Where are their tributes and candle-light vigils? Where are their charity drives? The innocent people who die in non-dramatic stories seem to whither away in relative obscurity compared to the pop coverage of these types of shootings (Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc.).

I mention this not to diminish the events that happened in Aurora. I'm just curious as to why stories like this one "catch on". There are many innocent people killed doing things that we all do every day, so I don't think it's because "it could have been me". I suspect it's the result of the rare nature of the Aurora shooting and the relatively large number of deaths in such a small area -- it's such a "shocking" event, unlike the vehicle fatalities or murders involved innocent folks that we're now accustomed to as we watch/read the news. If people really cared about innocent people dying, then it probably shouldn't matter how they died (well, within reason). How many people have donated to the families who have lost innocent loved ones in car accidents or other fatal events since Aurora?

Because there are some major qualitative differences between those events, and this one.

1) It was planned and executed by one person. You can't say the same of a car accident, point your finger at someone and say "he did it!". You can make that claim for a murder, but then it becomes...2) It's a matter of scale. If this guy had shot one person outside of the theater and was arrested then it'd be no more than a footnote on the local news.3) And yes, the circumstances themselves were dramatic. Humans love drama. It's very basic to human nature. Why do you think reality TV is so popular? True Crime literature? Drama! Conflict! We thrive on it. We sat around campfires and told stories long before we ever had agriculture.

People die every day, in various circumstances, some mundane, others tragic. This is an atrocity committed by one guy. We struggle to understand why this guy did what he did. We empathize with the survivors, wondering if we would have reacted like they did if the madboy had done the same thing at our theater. Eventually the public will move on. But at least try and understand why something like provokes the reaction it does.

I too hate when the rich come out with something that begs us normies to pony up the cash. I especially hate it when a celeb gets an illness and then suddenly ends up on tv talking about how we all have to donate to find a cure...that celeb didn't care about a cure until he/she had the illness...and these rich folk don't care a hoot about the suffering of the normies in everyday life...Rich people could just plunk down their own money for a change, like this shooting. If Zimmer wanted, he could buy each and every one of the people in that theater a new house or pay off every medical bill that the injured received...but no, he writes something on his piano that probably took him thirty minutes and basks in the glow of hero worship while us normies cough up the dough.Rich people have one rule, never invest your own money in a project. Follow that rule, and you'll get rich.

Not to be a dick, but:What's the money going to be used for? Are there any particularly large or unusual expenses associated with this tragedy? How much fundraising do the victims actually need?I have a feeling that all the direct costs of medical care, trauma counselling, etc. can be covered by local donations and funds that have already been received.